Gender and participatory evaluation Ratna M. Sudarshan Institute of Social Studies Trust, New Delhi Evaluation Conclave, New Delhi, October 2010

Key Themes How should we evaluate progress towards gender equality? Many different trajectories of change Contribution/ limitations of using participatory methods in evaluation Significance of context: for design, method, analysis, recommendations

Evaluations at ISST: data  Paper based on analysis of evaluations carried out by researchers at ISST over the last 5 years: A. ‘Concurrent evaluations’ for projects funded by ‘training of women for self employment’ programme, many implemented by NGOs National programme of GOI, projects in all states B. Impact assessments of NGO interventions for women’s empowerment, livelihood, community mobilisation for change

Evaluating progress towards gender equality Varying strategies for change: all interventions start by organising women into groups, but differ in focus: – Individual growth vs collective approaches – Women-only vs community initiative with special focus on women – Experiential vs more directional approach – Address immediate need vs underlying gendered constraints

Evaluating progress towards gender equality Balancing non-linear experiences of implementation with expectations of commissioner - linear progress is ‘normal’ Has the project done what it set out to do, within the allocated resources and time frame? With what measure of success? If not, what were the constraints, what factors impeded progress?

Evaluating progress: participatory methods help Design: – overall framework, sample selection Methods: – Structured/ semi structured interviews + – group discussions, open ended questions Analysis: – Understand strategies and process as well as outputs and outcomes (as far as time allows)

Significance of context Socio-cultural: these interventions seek to change deep rooted social norms: what is realistic pace of change? Geographic: how accessible? What is feasible set of choices around livelihood, for example Donor-NGO relationship: how much flexibility in changing strategies, or relative emphasis, with experience gained

Evaluating progress: the nuances Examples: A project leads to higher income or earning potential: but does it address impact on unpaid work and care; what would change? Adult women find work, adding to household income and their own eco empowerment – but are there inadvertent outcomes – eg irregular girls attendance in school; reduced milk consumption of children? Women receive training for new forms of income generating activity: but cannot question/ change seclusion norms: eg carpet weaving for own use, not for market

A gender lens does make a difference Training of adult women in growing medicinal plants for sale does not translate into actual production for the market: project did not factor in the fact of land ownership by men Challenge: Seeking sustainable change, progress towards gender equality and ‘empowerment’ – but trajectories of change not pre-determined; evaluation needs context specific progress markers

Evaluating progress: role of the evaluator Understanding and empathising with the underlying ‘theory of change’ Developing context specific progress markers Recognising non-linearity of change process, positive aspects of conflict/ apparent backward movement Evaluation not just for the commissioner, equally so for implementing agency - informal discussions to encourage evaluation use

Lessons learnt..  Participatory and context-sensitive approaches offer an insightful lens for evaluation  Questioning of some established indicators of progress towards gender equality  Immense value in capturing the process of change as well as outcomes  Expecting change over 2-3 years linked to project mode of funding: capacity building takes time  Understanding implementing agency phases into OD analysis

Thank you!